Fuel Economy Comparison



Similar documents
February 2015 ON-HIGHWAY HEAVY DUTY ENGINE MANUFACTURER S RECOMMENDED OIL DRAIN INTERVALS

School Bus Types There are seven vehicle types that can be manufactured to federal motor vehicle safety standards for

CONSUMER INFORMATION TRUCK-CAMPER LOADING

EDGE PRODUCTS EVOLUTION CS and CTS DIESEL POWER LEVELS AND SUPPORTED VEHICLE PARAMETERS (PIDs) [85100 and 85200]

Every mile in real-time. Introducing ZONAR

WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT SIZE AND WEIGHT LIMITS

Executive Guide to Fleet Fuel Economy Part 1 of 2: Vehicle Configuration and Operating Factors Emphasizing Fuel Economy Pays Off...

VS. COMPETITIVE COMPARISON Hino268/268A vs.freightliner M2-106 Business Class

EVERY ROUTE. ISB FOR SCHOOL BUS APPLICATIONS

FOREST RESOURCES ASSOCIATION INC. TECHNICAL LET S TALK TRUCKING: TRUCK PERFORMANCE AND FUEL CONSUMPTION 1

Cummins Westport The Natural Choice

SAE J1321 (TMC RP-1102) Type II Fuel Consumption Test

GUIDELINES FOR MOVEMENT OVER SOUTH CAROLINA HIGHWAYS OF OVERSIZE AND OVERWEIGHT VEHICLES AND LOADS

Alternative Fuel Sedans Section 1: Line Item Number (Mandatory)

Nationwide Fixed Guideway

NATIONAL TRANSPORT AND SAFETY AUTHORITY

Emission Facts. The amount of pollution that a vehicle emits and the rate at which

THE STYLISH, SPORTY. SCION tc

CNG and LNG: What s Best for Your Fleet?

Section 7. Layout of Driving Courses

Document Name: Driving Skills. Purpose: To outline necessary driving skills required to maximize driving safety.

Title: A Day in the Life of John Henry, Traffic Cop. Keywords: car accident, conservation of momentum, forces, friction

OVERSIZE/OVERWEIGHT PERMITS FOR DIVISIBLE LOADS

Cornerstone Montessori Elementary School BUS TRANSPORTATION SAFETY POLICY II. PLAN FOR STUDENT TRANSPORTATION SAFETY TRAINING

COMPANY VEHICLE OPERATING POLICY Effective May 2013

ROAD SIGNS IN JAPAN PARKING SIGNS. No Parking or Stopping Anytime SIZE & WEIGHT LIMIT SIGNS SPEED LIMIT SIGNS

PART I TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS

Fire Apparatus Operator: Pre-Course Driving Skills

DETROIT ENGINES DD13 DD15 TC DD16 VOCATIONAL PERFORMANCE

Chapter 10: TRANSPORTATION SAFETY

Transit in the United States 3. Operating Costs and Performance Measures 13. Quality of Transit Service 19. ADA Compliance Bus 28

Is there a magic bullet for fuel economy?

Procedure document. Department of Transport School Bus Centre Review

Villanova University Van Fleet Policy Effective Date: September 22, 2011 Revision Date: August 22, 2013

School Bus Safety Transportation Rules & Regulations

Cruising from Charleston

Safe School Transport

ARTICLE BEGINNING * PLEASE READ THIS FIRST * MODEL IDENTIFICATION VIN LOCATION VIN CODE ID EXPLANATION

. FLEET MANAGEMENT POLICY

CHAPTER 2 TRAFFIC SIGNS AND HIGHWAY MARKINGS

TRUCK ROUTE ENFORCEMENT AND REGULATIONS

FUEL ECONOMY STUDY. Comparing Performance and Cost of Various Ethanol Blends and Standard Unleaded Gasoline. American Coalition for Ethanol

Research Report. Impact of Vehicle Weight Reduction on Fuel Economy for Various Vehicle Architectures

Fire Apparatus Operator Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting

Alternative Fuel Or Low Emission School Buses In North Carolina: Draft Plan For Implementation

2009 Toyota Yaris 5dr HB Auto (SE) (1462) Prepared By:

A Guide to the Use of Maintenance Software and Computer Storage of Maintenance Records

Vehicle Service Contract. Extend your coverage. Eliminate your worries.

TMC RP-1109/SAE J1321 Type IV Fuel Consumption Test

Convoy Application For Motor Oil Limited Warranty

NAME: POWER UNIT ID: NAME OF APPLICANT (RESPONSIBLE MOTOR CARRIER) REGISTRATION/VIN STATE. Meet At: Meet Date: Meet Time:

Bendix Wingman ACB Active Cruise with Braking Questions & Answers

UNITED STATES AND U.S. TERRITORIES AND POSSESSIONS EXCEPT PUERTO RICO 2016 / WARRANTY & MAINTENANCE MANUAL

Level 2 Award in Safe Driving at Work

Maximum speed. Stop and Give way to Manually operated temporary No entry for give way traffic on STOP and GO signs vehicular traffic major road

(lie Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway

DTN GPS Tracker Fleet

M E M O R A N D U M. TO: Campus Community. SUBJECT: Vehicle Reservation Procedures. DATE: September 5, 2014

YOUR CHILD AND THE SCHOOL BUS

The Increasing Role of SUVs in Crash Involvement in Germany

GM 1500 Pick-Up 4WD 4" Suspension Lift Installation Instructions

Chapter Forty-seven. RURAL TWO-LANE/MULTILANE STATE HIGHWAYS (New Construction/Reconstruction) BUREAU OF DESIGN AND ENVIRONMENT MANUAL

City of Philadelphia Vehicle Crash Report Form Supervisor review instruction sheet

Driving in Fog, Rain and Wind for School Bus Drivers. Reference Guide and Test

Central Fleet Management

International Fuel Tax Agreement & International Registration Plan. Recordkeeping

407 Express Toll Route: How You Can Travel the 407 Anonymously

GENERAL KNOWLEDGE PRACTICE TEST

Adaptive Cruise Control

Town of Bellingham DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS. Snow and Ice Control FAQs. Q. Can I push snow from my property onto the sidewalk or street?

A STUDY ON WARNING TIMING FOR LANE CHANGE DECISION AID SYSTEMS BASED ON DRIVER S LANE CHANGE MANEUVER

White Paper fall Saving Through

Vehicle Accident Prevention TRUCK

Trailer safety. Required equipment Maintenance Safe operation Trailer classification

How Tonneau Covers Affect The Coefficient of Drag. Megan McKernan Research & Information Specialist Specialty Equipment Market Association 2007

Light-Duty Vehicle Purchase Approval Form

GPS Vehicle Tracking. The Complete Reference Guide

Points Jay Walking N 0

Duramax Maintenance Info

VOLVO WHEEL LOADERS BLOCK HANDLING

Truck Size, Weight and Route Regulation in Illinois. Presented to TRF Chicago Chapter By Larry Wilson, Wilson Consulting July, 2005

SCHOOL BUS SAFETY STOP WHAT PARENTS SHOULD KNOW

University Fleet Services

Sample Written Program For. Vehicles/Fleet

Shaping the future of public transport. Euro 6 product range

TRANSPORTATION SERVICES

RAILWAY INVESTIGATION REPORT R08W0219 EMPLOYEE INJURY

Analysis of Fleet Replacement Lifecycle

EPA/NHTSA Phase 2 Fuel Efficiency and Greenhouse Gas Standards for Heavy-Duty Trucks: Projected Effect on Freight Costs

Transcription:

Fuel Economy Comparison Thomas Built bus with Cummins ISB IC bus with MaxxForce 7 August 3 7, 2009 A fuel economy test was conducted between a Thomas Built bus and a Navistar IC bus. It was determined at the onset that this test would be a vehicle MPG comparison versus an engine comparison only. In this manner, testing would be conducted of competitive products available in the school bus market. The Thomas Built Saf-T-Liner C2 with Cummins ISB power and the Navistar IC bus CE series with Maxxforce 7 power were obtained from two school bus properties. The buses made available for testing are in-service buses and were tested without alteration of vehicle or engine specifications. The intent of the testing was to understand if a fuel economy difference was measureable and from this standpoint SAE J1526, Type III test methodology was followed. Weigh tanks were used for each test segment and engine run times were closely monitored per SAE J1526 guidelines. Two test routes were used: Test segments #1 and #2 used the same 77.5 mile Interstate and controlled access route to simulate transferring students to an activity in an adjacent school system. Test segments #3 and #4 used the same closed test track to simulate student pick-up and/or drop off. The closed test track was used in order to closely monitor traffic conditions and vehicle spacing, as well as test segment engine run time. Below are the bus specifications, test segments, and short descriptive test segment route notes. Bus Specifications: Thomas Built bus Navistar IC bus Engine: Cummins ISB Engine: MaxxForce7 Overall Length = 37 ft. 6 in. Overall Length = 36 ft. 6 in. Wheelbase = 21 ft 6 in. Wheelbase = 21 ft 6 in. Ground Clearance = 13.5 in. Ground Clearance = 12.5 in. Mileage = 10536 miles Mileage = 14913 miles Size = 72 Passenger Size = 66 Passenger Rating = 260 hp / 620 tq Rating = 215 hp / 550 tq Tread Front = 16/32 Tread Front = 15/32 Tread Rear = 18/32 Tread Rear = 14/32 Transmission = 2500 Transmission = 2500 Axle = 5.71 Axle = 5.29 1 Fuel Economy Comparison Cummins Inc. 10/09

Summary of Test Segments #1 and #2: Test segments #1 and #2 used the same 77.5 mile Interstate and controlled access route to simulate transferring students to an activity in an adjacent school system. Test #1 Interstate route 77.5 miles start = 140.10 start = 138.05 end = 87.90 end = 72.95 fuel used = 52.20 fuel used = 65.10 Thomas Built bus MPG = 10.54 IC bus MPG = 8.46 Thomas Built bus fuel economy advantage = 19.8% Test #1 segment notes: Heavy rain and cross winds with severe weather warnings. Excessive idling with stop and go traffic for 27 minutes due to an accident at mile marker 82. Additional accident at mile marker north of scheduled turn around point led to another session of idling with stop and go traffic for 19 minutes. Lighter traffic patterns on south leg of route. Test #1 route map: I-65 exit 64 north to exit 95. West to US 31, south to I-65 exit 76 then south to exit 64. See map below. Test #2 Interstate route 77.5 miles Thomas Built bus MPG = 11.85 IC bus MPG = 10.13 start = 135.35 start = 135.00 end = 88.90 end = 80.70 fuel used = 46.45 fuel used = 54.30 Thomas Built bus fuel economy advantage = 14.5% Test #2 segment notes: Overcast with light variable winds, light traffic. No additional stops due to accidents, etc. Same route as test segment #1. The Thomas Built bus did perform an active regeneration and the IC bus did not. This information was kept in anticipation of the IC bus eventually performing an active regeneration. This event (regeneration) did not take place. 2 Fuel Economy Comparison Cummins Inc. 10/09

Assumption: The ISB will use approximately 1 quart (1.77 lb) of fuel for an active regeneration. If this amount of fuel is added back to the amount used, the Thomas advantage becomes: start = 135.35 end = 88.90 fuel used = 46.45 Regen fuel = 1.77 Fuel used = 44.6 Thomas Built bus fuel economy advantage = 17.8% * This assumption will account for a major portion of the lost fuel economy advantage compared to test segment #1. Interstate test route shown below: 3 Fuel Economy Comparison Cummins Inc. 10/09

Summary of Test Segments #3 and #4: Test segments #3 and #4 used the same closed test track to simulate student pick-up and/or drop off. The closed test track was used in order to closely monitor traffic conditions and vehicle spacing, as well as test segment engine run time. Test #3 Pick up route 50.5 miles start = 135.75 start = 135.70 end = 85.70 end = 75.35 fuel used = 50.05 fuel used = 60.35 Thomas Built bus MPG = 7.17 IC bus MPG = 5.94 Thomas Built bus fuel economy advantage = 17.3% Test #3 segment notes: Stop and go route simulating student pick up ran at Cummins Inc. test track. See attached test track schematic. Sunny with light to variable winds. Test #4 Pick up route 50.5 miles Thomas Built bus MPG = 7.34 lc bus MPG = 6.09 start = 136.20 start = 136.00 end = 87.30 end = 77.20 fuel used = 48.90 fuel used = 58.80 Thomas Built bus fuel economy advantage = 17.1% Test #4 segment notes: Stop and go route simulating student pick up ran at Cummins Inc. test track. 4 Fuel Economy Comparison Cummins Inc. 10/09

Closed Track routes: 5 Fuel Economy Comparison Cummins Inc. 10/09